It is apparent to
everybody that we have major problems with our
healthcare
system. 43.7 million or 14.7 % of Americans are uninsured and another
34 million would
lose
their insurance if they became seriously ill. We spend more money per
capita
in the United States for fewer services than anywhere in the western
industrialized
world. We have the shortest life
expectancy and the highest infant
mortality of any industrialized country. European countries and
Canada
all
have systems that cover every citizen of their countries and their
death
rates reflect this. These are obvious problems with our healthcare
system
but there are other problems not as apparent as the social or ethical
issues.
According to a CIA analyst speaking at an ABC NEWS Nightline Clear and Present Danger as
America Fights Back; Town meeting discussion on how prepared America is
for bioterrorism threats on October 5, 2001, we are more
vulnerable to a bio-terror attack than
our
European allies due to our healthcare system. It would be nearly
impossible
to track the spread of a disease in the first hours of an attack since
many
uninsured people would not get diagnosed and treated until a disaster
was
already well in progress. In the European systems, any disease clusters
or
epidemic transmission patterns would emerge and be noticed hours or
days sooner than here since
people can see a physician without financial concerns.
It costs about $1000 more to build a
car in the United States than it does
in Canada due to the health care system in the United States. This is
why
GM and others moved from Michigan across the border to Ottawa, Canada. (Peter
Urmetzer, From
Free Trade to Forced Trade,
Canada in the Global Economy, pg. 127; Penguin Canada 2001)
The lack of universal health care actually causes US companies to
export jobs.
NAFTA and WTO rules allowing countries to subsidize health care, put
the
United States at a disadvantage right from the start. Let's enter the
20th
Century. (OK, it's the 21st century but that's the point.)

The economy of our country suffers
in
myriad ways as a result of our healthcare system. Illnesses that could
have been diagnosed and treated
early cost untold work
hours
lost to employees and employers alike. The cost
of treating seriously ill people is more than needed. Much more health
care expense is incurred than if people
had
been treated sooner.
A huge amount of health care expense is bureaucratic paperwork
for
the insurance companies. According to the United Nations World
Populations
Project, the United States spent 13.9% of our Gross Domestic Product on
health
care in 2001. This is more than any other country. Yet it is more
difficult
to see a doctor in the United States because of restrictions imposed by
insurance
companies and Health Management Organizations (HMOs). In single-payer
systems,
someone can see any doctor they wish whenever they need to and the
state
insurance policy pays. Single payer health insurance is not socialized
medicine
as some people fear. Doctors have their private practices and are paid
per
service by the federal insurance policy. Doctors would earn the same
money
they
do now but they would be less restricted in treatment options than they
are
by
the HMOs. It has been suggested that HMO's are more efficient than
Medicare but this is false.
There are those who believe that if they privatize
Medicare and
Medicaid
it will improve the service that the elderly receive. However,
statistics
show that HMOs
give poorer service than non-profit medical services or
Medicare.
They provided less follow up care, childhood immunizations were fewer,
and
even routine medical care was lacking. It is estimated that if all
American
woman joined an HMO and left their non-profit medical provider, the
death
toll from breast cancer would rise by 5,925. (Bleeding the Patient
quoting; JAMA, 1999; 282:Jul. 159 - 163)
HMO's also cost the patient more in premiums and out of pocket costs
which
harms the economy as a whole. In 2005, it will cost the America economy
$56.7
billion more in our current system than it would under a single payer
healthcare
system. (Lewin
Group 2002, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services, and Dean Baker, Center
for Economic and Policy Research) This is money we could be
using to create jobs even as healthcare improved.
Nearly 47% of all bankruptcies are a direct result of a medical
reason and
medical expense. This is another way our healthcare system damages our
economy.
There has been television advertising run by the insurance
companies
that claim many Canadians have to come down to the United States in
order to get treatment since the waiting lists there are so long. The
chart at the top
of this page shows the falsehood of that statement. This is one of the
many myths that insurance companies and HMOs promulgate
It has also been said that the Washington State attempt at
single-payer
health insurance would have harmed business and was the cause of its
failure to make the
ballot. It was only
the extremely well financed HMO advertizing campaign that defeated it.
The
fact is that most businesses would be spending less and have less
reason
to out-source or move outside of the US if we had a single-payer
system. Much of the money that would finance
single-payer is existing money from payroll taxes for Medicare and
Medicaid,
as suggested by Ambassador Carol Moseley Braun during her 2004
presidential campaign. Some money from individuals that would have
paid for insurance premiums could also be applied
to the fund. The fact is that many people would be paying less than
they
do now. Businesses would pay into the fund as well but as has been
demonstrated,
the cost for many businesses would drop. Only businesses, that have no
health
benefits for employees, would pay a little more but any small startup
mom
and pop businesses could have a health care tax break depending on size
and
other variables. Only individuals who didn't have health insurance now
would
be paying a slightly higher tax but they would become fully insured.
They
would never have to worry about health care again. Children would be
born
insured and prenatal care would be received automatically. Those too
ill
to work would get better treatments sooner and be able to return to the
workforce
at a higher rate than currently possible. As has been proven by study
after
study, the quality of healthcare would go up and the over all cost
would
go down.
Many people who are receiving Medicare or Medicaid had to wait months
until they were determined to be eligible for the benefits. Often this
is after they had lost their employer based insurance policy after an
extended sick leave. In the interim, their illnesses were progressing.
Single-payer would eliminate this and save billions of dollars in time
and paperwork. Those
currently receiving Medicare and Medicaid would continue to receive all
benefits
as the system was phased into a single payer program. The Medicare
Bill
Plan D recently
passed in Congress was merely putting a band-aid on a severed artery.
What's
worse, is that the new Medicare Bill costs much more than was
originally
stated by the Bush administration. This cost increase is a direct
result
of privatization of prescription drug insurance. Any healthcare system
that
includes private insurance companies is doomed to failure. The
insurance corporations
don't want you to be aware of this.
Over the years there have been many attempts to reform the
healthcare
system. In 1994, the Clinton Administration attempted to improve the
system
with the Guaranteed Health Insurance Act
of 1994 but that bill was defeated by the Contract on America designed
by
Newt
Gingrich. Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. introduced a House Joint
Resolution 30, a Constitutional Amendment
to insure equal quality healthcare for all Americans. Representative
John
Conyers and Representative Jim McDermott introduced House Resolution
676,
The United States National Health Insurance Act into the 107th
Congress.
Rep. Conyers has re-introduced H.R. 676 into the current 110th
Congress.
Rep. McDermott alsohas reintroduced a bill, H.R.1200, The American
Health Security Act of 2007into
the 110th Congress.
If you wish the United States to create a national
healthcare
plan you can write your elected officials. Many officials
receive large campaign donations
from HMOs and pharmaceutical companies. Any officials that do not wish
to support a single-payer
universal
healthcare system can be voted out of office. You can let them know
that
their vote will change yours. Promote candidates that support universal
health
care and donate money to their campaigns. Write letters to the editor.
Demand that America enters the 21st century.

This website
contains copyrighted material the use
of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, some material on this website is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed an interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.